this post was submitted on 19 Jul 2024
291 points (96.8% liked)
Technology
59390 readers
2556 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related content.
- Be excellent to each another!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
Approved Bots
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
The problem is indeed me in that I use an ergonomic Logitech mouse because RSI is a bitch.
And that mouse absolutely demands that you use Logitech's annoying peripheral controller software, which also insists on updating with game button profiles every time you reboot your PC. Welcome to the future.
Hey, I agree that it's bad and annoying and quite ridiculous for a mouse or just to use RGB lights. I really hope that MS's centralized RGB management will replace most of it. My current keyboard already supports it and it's great to have it right in the OS settings instead of being bloatware.
But my point isn't that endless superfluous apps are a good thing, it's that being big mad about a software and gaming platform requesting you to log in to it is at best anachronistic and at worst not a thing you want, given you are using your credit card and streaming your desktop through it.
It sucks that Logitech is one of the few competitors in that space, yeah. I've got a vertical mouse. I'm not going to install their garbage software, and luckily it behaves itself normally out of the box. I honestly should have returned it though.
I have a Steam account, sure, having a login to associate purchases with makes sense. A peripheral, though, absolutely not. I'm viewing the VR headsets in more of the monitor category. It shouldn't be connected to the wifi on its own to be able to forward the desktop. It should be like a GPU, drivers in the kernel and a software layer that exposes a more uniform API for developers.
It's exhausting. I just bought a monitor and there were all sorts of "smart" monitors I had to filter out. Even then I had to look all inputs to make sure it had a regular C14 power connector so I don't have dumb power brick garbage all over.
?
FWIW, I use a Logitech G502 Hero mouse and a G512 Carbon keyboard and I do indeed use their "G Hub" applet to reconfigure the buttons and RGB shit, and all. I have never, not once, ever created or signed into an account to use it and this has not precluded me from using any feature I've ever wanted to. I have no idea why Logitech even offers the option to create an account to use for their app other than probably some idiot with an MBA at Logitech read about it and got the idea from his 2014 copy of "Techbro for dummies."
Yeah, but that's my point. People rage at Meta for requiring a Facebook login out of pure reflex. The Quest isn't a peripheral, it's a standalone computing device. It boots into an OS when you turn it on, using it with a PC is an added feature.
Nobody complained about this specifically when Apple did it with the Vision. Nobody complains about needing to log in to use the PSVR headset on a PlayStation.
If you are more than superficially interested in this space you may remember that the reason why there's all this residual rage is that when Oculus got acquired they already had a login system and there was a lot of back and forth and backtracking from Meta, first saying the Oculus login would stay in place and then enraging people by putting the Quest under their unified "login with Facebook" login manager.
That was legitimate. They were doing things they said they wouldn't do, it was impractical to sync to an account bearing your real name as a demand of the EULA, and this wasn't the first time Oculus had reneged on promises.
At this point, though, a couple of hardware generations down the line, years after they reversed that policy and with a well established ecosystem that works pretty much exactly the same way an Xbox does? This is purely reflexive "Meta bad" stuff that is disconnected to whether the login requirement makes sense, is convenient, does anything untoward or any other practical consideration.
I'm just sitting here with my WMR headset which works perfectly well for all my games and software without needing an account from anybody. The only bugbear is that it's tied to Windows (for now), but what else is new?
Yeeeeah, how much did that cost?
Cause I know this is a huge mess of a thread, but the point was whether the Quest is a good entry level headset. Last I checked the Quest 2 starts at 250 bucks. Is there a WMR device for under twice that?
Also, do you have a Steam account or are those games and software being delivered by mail?
I don't think the Quest is the only option that makes sense, but it's certainly the entry point no-brainer, even if that's relying on Meta spending a ton of money to keep people within their ecosystem.
About $400, and remember that at the time I bought it the Quest 3 wasn't even announced yet. The Quest 2 was the new hotness from Facebook and the Reverb G2's resolution is superior which was also an important attribute for me. 1,832 × 1,920 per eye vs. 2160 x 2160. And at that time the cheapest Quest 2 was not $250, it was $299.
A Steam account is irrelevant. You're building straw men to ignore the fact that a WMR headset itself physically works without any account requirement whatsoever tied to the hardware. But if you insist that ever having to type in a password for anyone is some kind of "gotcha," which it isn't, my Reverb G2 absolutely does work with every game that natively supports VR in Windows that I've tried which includes Elite: Dangerous, No Man's Sky, MS Flight Sim, Asetto Corsa, Project Cars/2, etc. All of these games can be had outside of the Steam environment. Yes, it even works with pirated games. You don't even need a Microsoft account to download and play free (not paid) VR games and "experiences" from the Windows store! If you absolutely insist, you can even play Oculus titles on it using ReVive.
There is no technological reason any of Meta/Facebook's hardware products need to force you to sign in with a Facebook account just to work. A lot of people, myself included, will never buy a Meta VR product no matter how shiny or cheap they make it because of that reason, and where it comes from.
No, I'm not building a straw man. The argument that having to use a log in at all is a dealbreaker has been made here repeatedly. You do not need a Steam account to use a Quest, you are just as gated in both cases. There is only duplication at play if you use the Quest as both a standalone device and a HMD. And all the major platforms where you'll get content delivered for your device make you log in to digitall distribute the software.
Outside of the context of the history of people getting mad about the Facebook account requirement while that was in place no reasonable person would understand the virulence at play here. It makes no sense. Why would people be so fundamentally angry, furious at the idea of having to have an account to use a gaming platform. Nobody cares on PlayStation, Xbox Live was hailed as a major innovation despite introducing not just a login but also a fee to play online. Steam introduced digital distribution and DRM into the PC market and it's widely considered a net positive for the gaming industry.
So why is the Quest so much worse than those?
The answer is, of course, it isn't. It's a heavily subsidized platform with a first party store requirement, just like Xbox, PlayStation or the Switch. The anger is a carryover from a previous incident that is no longer applicable but people don't want to let go, partially because it blends with other complaints about the brand.
By the way, you seem to have gotten a deal for that Reverb G2, my understanding is it launched at 600, not 400, and that was one of the more affordable options in that space at the time. I feel that if you're going to nitpick the 50 bucks discount I get to call you out on the 33% discount there.
Look, I think you're being honest about your impressions here. I believe you when you say that you just won't buy a Meta VR product because it's from Meta regardless of how cheap or good it is. That's one of the most sincere takes I've seen in this mess of a dogpile so far. And it's your prerogative. I'm not here to sell Quests to people. Presumably giving them out for peanuts did that well enough, if the reported numbers are to be believed.
I do reserve the right to my opinion that this is a very unreasonable stance that ignores the places where Meta did respond to community demands and that newcomers with no horse on that race for purely emotional or ideological reasons should probably consider it as an entry point. If you want to be mad about it, be mad about it, but that seems like a reasonable take that shouldn't be particularly offensive.